About your Search

20121108
20121116
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5
is close to paul ryan. he's one of those 100. if paul ryan wants to run for president in 2016 -- >> they're talking about jeb bush and chris christie and marco rubio. >> but he has a big future in politics in the republican party. >> i haven't seen paul ryan in four or five months. >> anyway, all i'm suggesting is -- >> has he been around? i thought he left the country. >> they will remember. >> i won't take cheap shots. >> you think he's in the witness protection program? >> i'm not going to take a cheap shot. he has not come on on the show and he was on a lot. so i won't take a cheap shot. he hasn't been training for the marathon. that was going to be my cheap shot that i wasn't going to take, but he has not been on this show until though he used to come on all the time. >> was it a cheap shot? >> yeah. >> probably was. anyway, of course he's one of the 100. there's a the lot of guys in there that -- i know plouffe says it was a clear vote by americans that they want taxes raised. there are a lot of thins that went into that election. and i think the exit polls was at like 40% said tha
about the role of paul ryan in all of this and whether he will be able to work with boehner on this and whether he has to take a hard position against boehner. >> and whether eric cantor will go along with whatever plan boehner puts out. >> i think it will be tough sledding. >> i still think it would be easier to sell a one year, you know, and then do bigger tax reform. do one year, everybody can agree on that. >> we're not getting a solution. if the democrats have r. so convinced about below 250, you can still have an argument about whether it's a good idea up there in a recession to raise taxes. >> it's the idea of closing loopholes and finding a way to raise revenue so is you can say, yes, we are raising revenue by doing this. >> the other thing i kept hearing was this idea of maybe going from 250 up to a million bucks. and whether that would change the conversation. >> it probably would. >> conservatives didn't farewell and there's a lot of hammering. but here's one who speaks for some conservatives. he's saying we do not accept bipartisanship in the pursuit of tyranny.
has spending cuts on the table. it's the rate of increase, even paul ryan's was going to grow spending at 3% or so a year. >> what would you cut, wilbur? >> hmm? >> what would you not slow but cut? >> you have to deal with medical, for example, talking about the reform in health care is a joke if you don't deal with medical malpractice. there's been no talk about that at all on either side of the aisle. that's a joke that leads to overtesting, too expensive insurance policies. malpractice is not inherent in providing universal health care. >> a couple of points. first of all, wilbur raised the bar by the way, if you're talk being not just slowing the rate of growth of spending but cutting spending that makes the solution a lot harder. i'm not saying you're wrong. i happen to disagree with you. >> i didn't say we should cut actual spending. i said that the verbiage about it is wrong because we're not cutting spend willing. we' we'readjusting the rate of growth. >> we haven't talked about the fact that everybody up there in washington agrees with 98% of the tax policy that should reset w
the "new york times." democrats like a romney idea. >> did you see paul ryan's comment? >> no. but i got my button back on because i'm -- i'm going to tell that you rise above is kind of like a rorschach thing. because for me, rise above means democrats rising above the obsession with rates and realizing broadening the bates is better -- >> it means coming together. >> that is a way of coming together. you're raising revenue. your only way is if the republicans say yes -- >> no, that is not true. my way is anyway you come up with an agreement is a great way. you're only looking from one side of the aisle. >> but they'll never agree to raising rates about sfw. >> i will give you that it is a error sha rorschach test, but i want you to actually cut some things and i want you to deal with expenditures. >> you have the same house that said no to 39.6 on the high he said. but a way of raising revenue will spur growth -- they're coming around to the correct version right here. >> what about the idea democrats say we will take on the social issues, we will take on makinging sure that we're cutting
saw what paul ryan said. the house was re-elected. so people re-elected those people in the house for a reason. it's a nonstarter. it's not going to happen. it's not going to be 1.6 billion. 1.6 trillion. to get to four trillion, that would be 2.4. so we said that. he'll go not 3-1 like simpson bowles. he's go one and a half to one. >> that's not going to happen either. >> but what bothers me -- >> the problem is nothing is going to happen. >> what bothers me is i do think you can get to a point where you raise taxes too much and you don't cut spending enough, where you're just funding entitlements by raising taxes and you don't do anything about it. if he had his way, i really think he would do that. i still don't think he gets it. >> when you hear people who are saying things like that, my guess is if you had boehner and president obama sit down in a room together, they could probably come up with an approach. >> we'll see. you don't have your button. >> i do. >> i'll just make one point. >> what's that? >> if you don't rise above, you know what you do? you sink below. you sink
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)